On Thu, Jan 08, 2004 at 09:20:02AM +0800, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> >Whether your name is being displayed nicely is a whole 'nother matter.
> >On my machine I see "Dennis Bj-rklund" or "Dennis Bj rklund" depending
> >on which display I look at :-(. I think this is a font issue, but I
> >do
AFAICS, you're sending
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dennis_Bj=F6rklund?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
which is an instance of the encoding scheme Bruno mentioned. I have
never heard that it is only supposed to be used in Subject:
... certainly there are a ton of people besides you who use it in From:.
So I
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 15:17:26 -0500,
Tom Lane <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> AFAICS, you're sending
> From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dennis_Bj=F6rklund?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> which is an instance of the encoding scheme Bruno mentioned. I have
> never heard that it is only supposed to be used in
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Dennis_Bj=F6rklund?= <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
>>> ps I've just changed my email name to my real name which is Dennis
>>> Björklund.
>>
>> It still isn't legal to use non US ASCII characters in headers. There
>> is an encoding scheme th
On Wed, 7 Jan 2004, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > ps I've just changed my email name to my real name which is Dennis
> > Björklund.
>
> It still isn't legal to use non US ASCII characters in headers. There
> is an encoding scheme that can be used for the subject header.
I hoped that pine was going
Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 06:58:37 +0100,
> Dennis Bj?rklund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > ps I've just changed my email name to my real name which is Dennis
> > Bj?rklund. I did that 5 years ago (still using pine) and got angry mails
> > back saying that my mails whe
On Wed, Jan 07, 2004 at 06:58:37 +0100,
Dennis Björklund <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> ps I've just changed my email name to my real name which is Dennis
> Björklund. I did that 5 years ago (still using pine) and got angry mails
> back saying that my mails where broken. I hope the todays email
On Tue, 6 Jan 2004, Tom Lane wrote:
> > Does this complete this TODO?
> > o Allow parameters to be specified by name and type during
> > definition
>
> Uh, no; the lack of documentation updates being one of the more glaring
> omissions. I should think that psql's \df needs some tho
